RE: [Xen-devel] RE: [PATCH] x86: add CMCI software injection interface

["Jiang, Yunhong" <yunhong.jiang@xxxxxxxxx>]

>-----Original Message-----
>From: Keir Fraser [mailto:keir.fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
>Sent: Wednesday, May 05, 2010 4:54 PM
>To: Jiang, Yunhong; Frank Van Der Linden; Ke, Liping
>Cc: Christoph@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Egger; xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx;
>gavin.maltby@xxxxxxxxxx
>Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] RE: [PATCH] x86: add CMCI software injection interface
>
>On 05/05/2010 08:11, "Jiang, Yunhong" <yunhong.jiang@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>> Maybe another method is to add a new do_mca command for the CMCI, like
>> #define XEN_MC_cmci_inject    6
>>
>> Of course, we can update the interface version, to make the new command will
>> only be supported in new version. So that when new dom0 will not get
>> un-expected result when running in old xen hypervisor.
>
>To be honest either of these is fine with me. I expect Christoph will prefer
>the former option, but actually so long as older dom0 kernels fail-safe on
>the MCE stuff that would be good by me too. Weird behaviours and odd
>failures from older guests is what we absolutely want to avoid.
>
>If going with the former option it would be good to think ahead in your
>designs and make sure you end up adding the smallest possible number of new
>XEN_MC_* commands. It could easily become a real mess I'm sure.

"either of these"? Maybe I didn't express my idea clearly. I didn't propose two 
options. I just suggest to use a new command for this purpose. And we can 
update the version number if needed.

BTW, as currently Xen already will return -EINVAL for not-support command (i.e. 
<= 5), maybe the version number update is not needed. ( the -EINVAL may be not 
good as -ENOSYS).

--jyh
>
> -- Keir
>



_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel